- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/26512690
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/26512687
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/26512690
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/26512687
My current opinion is, a message can be good or bad regardless of the source. That can have exception when there’s hidden implication of support for evil deeds (ex. all lives matter). In this case, I can recognize the truth in this message that still resonates today and don’t see the implication of support for the entirety of Stalin’s actions. Also, bringing up the iron curtain is actual pretty ironic, given that was about isolationism and this comic is (at least on the surface) anti-isolationist.
Right, but it also ignores the other side of the coin which was (is) the state controls all media.
It’s saying our un-fair media is better than their un-fair media and ultimately pushes no good message.
We should cool with concern at ANYONE on ANY SIDE that asks you to ignore what everyone else says.
“Its a wonderful life” was banned in the 50s for being too communist for portraying a banker as the enemy.
Messages age like wine or like milk
… banned where?
O you do research about an obscure communist comics from russia iron curtain era, but not about movies deemed controversial in america… got it.
You said it was banned.
It wasn’t banned in the USA.
I’m asking you where it was banned, which is different than “deemed controversial”.
Words have meaning my dude, I’m going to be honest furthering this “conversation” with you is obviously a waste of my time.
not anymore. Not since the early aughts anyway. Yes it’s much more visible and “professional” than almost anything on the web but it’s not the case that there are no other outlets for any mass messaging, as was definitely the case for the rest of history.
It’s a great point, but the medium is the message. As they say. Which may be the only context ever where I’ve felt that made sense.
That isn’t portrayed in this comic.
THEY DO THIS (implication is we don’t) WHICH CAUSES THIS (implication is ours doesn’t)
My dude don’t be dense about the messaging.
Maybe those implications were valid 100 years ago. My first response was about how you can interpret a message out of context. The context of this message doesn’t have to be relevant to today.
The context is still important, though, because it’s important to remember that no matter how true something might be, it’s important to look at the intent behind the messaging and who is saying it lest you fall down a rabbit hole of trusting a group with malicious motivations. Like if somebody posted a comic about the Civil War being about states’ rights as commentary on the overreach of Republican federal government (especially right now), they’d be technically correct, but states’ rights to do what? To use the slave labor that their economies depended on. That’s a very different scenario from states fighting the federal government today to ensure that women still have access to healthcare. Plus, knowing the context of this comic adds the layer of irony that, regardless of their original motivations as a country politically opposed to the US, they ended up being right in more ways than they probably could’ve imagined at the time. A broken clock is still right twice a day, etc.
Look at the Washington Post. A perfect example of the context behind why this comic was created in reverse as well as a perfect example of why the comic is so relevant. A news organization that attempted to be as unbiased as they could and did a pretty good job of it, but has been bought by Jeff Bezos. I would trust their older work to be fairly unbiased and truthful, but I’d take everything they put out today with a critical lense looking for the corporate propaganda aspect.